She (He?) is completely off the bat when speaking about regulating Bitcoin, no one ever said anything about regulating Bitcoin. I'll go in a little more depth later about our interactions with regulatory bodies, but basically we neither asked permission, nor sought regulation for Bitcoin.

Fiat is regulated : fact.Bitcoin is not : fact.

Bitcoin exchanges are by definition an interface between these worlds, so I fail to see how it comes as a big surprise to anyone that in order to be sustainable in this business an exchange has to be licensed for the fiat-handling part.

A gummy bears/EUR exchange would probably have had the exact same problems, but probably less stupid fanatics and fanboys running around screaming and calling us heretics to The Cause™.

Bitcoin is about freedom and freedom means freedom of choice. If Bitcoin became very popular (say PayPal sized in volume) most users would WANT to put their money in a "bank". They don't want the responsibility that comes with the freedom Bitcoin offers. Sure Bitcoin gives you the freedom to bypass the banks but it also gives you the "freedom" to lose your entire life savings as easily as you lost those vacation photos from last year.

A much too easily and frequently overlooked point. Bitcoin will never kill banks, it will just transform them into "Bitcoin Wallet Security Providers", much like cars haven't destroyed chariot riding, they've just transformed it into "hansome cab rides".

« Asking for the State to bless Bitcoin businesses in an attempt to induce its birth is not the way to grow adoption. Anyone who is impatient for it to grow needs to be learn patience and write more software, not run to the State to cripple the baby before it is born ».

I'm confused now. You guys might actually be right.

What amused me about that particular comment response, and I think it at least suggests why so many an-caps are getting so het up about all this is I think many of them think they are living in an Ayn Rand novel. They forget for real people making real decisions in the real world a decision to involve an organisiation that is subject to governmental regulation does not suddenly turn them into a sleazy Rand character who will invariably turn into a monster. As original as she was, and I do have a lot of respect for what she brought to the table, fortunately real people and the real world, are more complex, more creative, more beautiful and much less cynical than Rand's imagination. And despite the haughty moral certainty with which Crina Belododia's lengthy response was written a friend should tap him/her on the shoulder and remind them they're not actually John Galt!

If you have a machine on 24/7 why not have a full Bitcoin client running on it to support the network?

...no one (at least at Paymium) ever said anything about regulating Bitcoin. I'll go in a little more depth later about our interactions with regulatory bodies, but basically we neither asked permission, nor sought regulation for Bitcoin.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to this if I were you. Thinking about what I just posted about some of the an-caps living in an Ayn Rand novel it really explains something I've been puzzling about. Crina Belododia is not the first to make accusations based on ridiculous assumptions regarding the motives and long-term plans of you, Bitpay and others. In their simplistic world-view if you have made a decision with which they can see a parallel with one of Ayn Rand's characters, you are that character in their eyes and so they believe their conclusions as to how you will behave in future, stifling all competition, getting into bed with regulators to buy you favours at everybody else's expense etc. are actually justified.

The irony is that many think this way of seeing the world and of judging people is actually objective!!

The knee-jerk reaction that Bitcoin-Central, by involving a partner that is subject to regulation is necessarily commiting some kind of philosophical bad; then jumping through mental hoops to find a way of rationalising the conclusion they'd already come to - including totally unfounded accusations - is not what I'd call being objective.

If you have a machine on 24/7 why not have a full Bitcoin client running on it to support the network?

Integration and easy to use is what people want from Bitcoin and this what makes it easier to become mainstream, and certainly this is where it's all going. But it also demotivates people from creating and using tools to circumvent current laws and the whole system becomes dependent on current regulations. Your blog past has valid arguments and as usual the truth is somewhere in between those two view points, but don't pretend like you know exactly what is the correct thing here in a long term.

So TCP/IP needed to get approval from the "regulators" before it was widely adopted?

Then the bitcoin protocol may not be all it is cracked up to be .... if Erik Vorhees is correct that bitcoin needs the crutch of state approval in order to get widely adopted, then I would say it is deficient as a technology and not fit for purpose .... bring on bitcoin2.0. (Holy Trinity should be nimble for the crypto-currency 2G will be life threatening for them.)

So TCP/IP needed to get approval from the "regulators" before it was widely adopted?

Then the bitcoin protocol may not be all it is cracked up to be .... if Erik Vorhees is correct that bitcoin needs the crutch of state approval in order to get widely adopted, then I would say it is deficient as a technology and not fit for purpose .... bring on bitcoin2.0. (Holy Trinity should be nimble for the crypto-currency 2G will be life threatening for them.)

So TCP/IP needed to get approval from the "regulators" before it was widely adopted?

Then the bitcoin protocol may not be all it is cracked up to be .... if Erik Vorhees is correct that bitcoin needs the crutch of state approval in order to get widely adopted, then I would say it is deficient as a technology and not fit for purpose .... bring on bitcoin2.0. (Holy Trinity should be nimble for the crypto-currency 2G will be life threatening for them.)

So TCP/IP needed to get approval from the "regulators" before it was widely adopted?

Then the bitcoin protocol may not be all it is cracked up to be .... if Erik Vorhees is correct that bitcoin needs the crutch of state approval in order to get widely adopted, then I would say it is deficient as a technology and not fit for purpose .... bring on bitcoin2.0. (Holy Trinity should be nimble for the crypto-currency 2G will be life threatening for them.)

Oh god, please stop with this regulating Bitcoin nonsense.

Yes, indeed we should just stop with this nonsense of getting the bitcoin technology regulated ....

So TCP/IP needed to get approval from the "regulators" before it was widely adopted?

Then the bitcoin protocol may not be all it is cracked up to be .... if Erik Vorhees is correct that bitcoin needs the crutch of state approval in order to get widely adopted, then I would say it is deficient as a technology and not fit for purpose .... bring on bitcoin2.0. (Holy Trinity should be nimble for the crypto-currency 2G will be life threatening for them.)

Oh god, please stop with this regulating Bitcoin nonsense.

Yes, indeed we should just stop with this nonsense of getting the bitcoin technology regulated ....

We honestly didn't think there would be this kind of massive interest from Americans and other nationalities all around the world. We honestly didn't think there would be this kind of massive interest from Americans and other nationalities all around the world.

Welcome to the new age of fiscal facism ... US citizens will flock to anything that is somehow outside their fiscal prison of a banking system where you don't have to submit to the psychological equivalent of a full cavity search just to manage and transact with your own money.

You come across as being a little naive to the true nature of the battle going on out there ... good luck.

We honestly didn't think there would be this kind of massive interest from Americans and other nationalities all around the world. We honestly didn't think there would be this kind of massive interest from Americans and other nationalities all around the world.

Welcome to the new age of fiscal facism ... US citizens will flock to anything that is somehow outside their fiscal prison of a banking system where you don't have to submit to the psychological equivalent of a full cavity search just to manage and transact with your own money.

You come across as being a little naive to the true nature of the battle going on out there ... good luck.

+1

Why do you think eurodollars even exist? (For the past 50 or so years).

So TCP/IP needed to get approval from the "regulators" before it was widely adopted?

Then the bitcoin protocol may not be all it is cracked up to be .... if Erik Vorhees is correct that bitcoin needs the crutch of state approval in order to get widely adopted, then I would say it is deficient as a technology and not fit for purpose .... bring on bitcoin2.0. (Holy Trinity should be nimble for the crypto-currency 2G will be life threatening for them.)

Oh god, please stop with this regulating Bitcoin nonsense.

Yes, indeed we should just stop with this nonsense of getting the bitcoin technology regulated ....

No one here is asking for that.

Maybe not overtly or knowingly, but they are undoubtedly paving the way for it.